Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
The Scientific World Journal
Volume 2013, Article ID 964737, 6 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/964737
Research Article

Characterization of Urban Runoff Pollution between Dissolved and Particulate Phases

School of Urban Construction, Hebei University of Engineering, Handan, Hebei 056038, China

Received 17 May 2013; Accepted 19 June 2013

Academic Editors: S. Niranjan, L. Wang, and Q. Wang

Copyright © 2013 Zhang Wei et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

To develop urban stormwater management effectively, characterization of urban runoff pollution between dissolved and particulate phases was studied by 12 rainfall events monitored for five typical urban catchments. The average event mean concentration (AEMC) of runoff pollutants in different phases was evaluated. The AEMC values of runoff pollutants in different phases from urban roads were higher than the ones from urban roofs. The proportions of total dissolved solids, total dissolved nitrogen, and total dissolved phosphorus in total ones for all the catchments were 26.19%–30.91%, 83.29%–90.51%, and 61.54–68.09%, respectively. During rainfall events, the pollutant concentration at the initial stage of rainfall was high and then sharply decreased to a low value. Affected by catchments characterization and rainfall distribution, the highest concentration of road pollutants might appear in the later period of rainfall. Strong correlations were also found among runoffs pollutants in different phases. Total suspended solid could be considered as a surrogate for particulate matters in both road and roof runoff, while dissolved chemical oxygen demand could be regarded as a surrogate for dissolved matters in roof runoff.

1. Introduction

With rapid urbanization and industrialization, surface water quality of urban watersheds has deteriorated gradually in many cities of the world. To tackle this problem, much attention has been paid to reducing pollutant loads of point sources. However, the water quality has not been improved obviously [1]. Urban runoff has been considered as one of the primary causes of water quality degradation [2, 3]. And along with the expansion of point sources control, the contribution of water quality degradation from urban runoff pollution is increasing.

Understanding the characteristics of urban runoff pollution is beneficial to develop urban stormwater management effectively. Due to the randomicity of natural rainfall and the complexity of urban catchments, urban runoff pollution is characterized by the occurrence of great temporal and spatial variability [4]. Urban runoff pollutants are divided into six specific groups, such as solids, heavy metals, biodegradable organic matter, organic micropollutants, pathogenic microorganisms, and nutrients, which are originated mainly from wet and dry deposition, grind tire debris, vegetation (leaves and logs), animals (fecal contributions and dead bodies), fertilizers, and exhaust gas from vehicle, and so forth [5, 6]. In many literatures on urban runoff pollution, the analyses of measurement parameters were usually carried out on whole water samples [79]. Furthermore, some researchers deem that particle substances are the main category of urban runoff pollutants, while particle size distribution on impervious surfaces in urban environments determines the characteristics of urban runoff pollution [1012].

Actually, runoff pollutants in the environment exist mainly in the form of particulate and dissolved phase, which is one of leading factors on selection of stormwater quality control measures [1315]. However, little information is available on characterizing the dissolved pollutants in urban runoff, especially the comparison of runoff pollutants between particulate and dissolved phase. The main objective of this study focuses on characterizing the discharge of runoff pollutants in different phases from urban typical catchments.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Sites

Handan city is located in the south portion of Hebei province, China, which is geographically located between north latitude 36°20′–36°44′ and east longitude 114°03′–114°40′. In Handan city, the mean annual rainfall is 558.5 mm and the average annual temperature is 13.5°C. Urban district covered an area of 118.6 km2 in 2009, and its population was 1.16 million. For this study, two roads and three roofs were selected as urban typical catchments. The catchments characteristics were shown in Table 1.

tab1
Table 1: Characteristics of urban typical catchments.
2.2. Monitoring and Sampling

In this study, 12 rainfall events were collected in 2011. Rainfall data were monitored by a telemetry rain gauge (SL1, China), which was placed near all the study sites. Table 2 provided the dates of monitoring events and related parameters.

tab2
Table 2: Rainfall dates and related parameters of monitoring events in this study.

The sample collection was performed simultaneously in five study sites. Road runoff was sampled at stormwater inlets, while roof runoff was at the bottom of the vertical drain pipes. At the beginning of runoff generation, samples were collected at every 5 minutes intervals. When the rainfall duration was more than 30 minutes, sampling interval would be extended to 10–30 minutes until the runoff disappeared or water quality became gradually stable [16]. More than 9 samples were taken during a rain event.

2.3. Data Analyses

The simples of both road and roof runoff were tested for total solids (TS), total dissolved solids (TDS), total chemical oxygen demand (TCOD), dissolved chemical oxygen demand (DCOD), total nitrogen (TN), dissolved total nitrogen (DTN), total phosphorus (TP), and dissolved total phosphorus (DTP). Unfiltered samples were analyzed for TS, TCOD, TN, and TP, which represent total pollutants of urban runoff. For determination of dissolved pollutants represented by TDS, DCOD, DTN, and DTP, the samples were pretreated by a 0.45 μm Millipore filter membrane [17, 18]. All parameters were analyzed in accordance with standard methods specified in APHA 2005 [19]. Moreover, the concentration of particulate pollutants which included total suspended solid (TSS), particulate chemical oxygen demand (PCOD), particulate total nitrogen (PTN), and particulate total phosphorus (PTP) could be determined by total ones minus dissolved ones [20].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. AEMC of Runoff Pollutants from Different Catchments

Event mean concentration (EMC) has been widely used to evaluate the runoff pollution load for receiving waters in an individual storm event [21], which is given by the following equation: where is rainfall duration; is time interval of sampling; ,   are mean runoff quantity and pollutant concentration at time interval, respectively.

However, affected by rainfall distribution and catchments types, EMC of urban runoff is significantly variable in each event or in each catchment [22]. Then, average EMC (AEMC) was put forward to predict the overall runoff quality accurately by data from more than one rainfall event [23]. Based on statistical analysis for a total of 645 samples during 12 rainfall events, the AEMC values of runoff pollutants in different phases were shown in Table 3.

tab3
Table 3: AEMC values and proportion of runoff pollutants in different phases.

In general, the AEMC values of runoff pollutants in different phases from urban roads (RD1 and RD2) were higher than the ones from urban roofs (RF1, RF2, and RF3). It was suggested that road runoff is more polluted than roof runoff. Compared with RD2, runoff pollution of RD1 was more serious because of heavier traffic. Pollution rank of roof runoff was in the following order: RF1 > RF2 > RF3. It might be caused that the cover material of RF1 is asphalt, which was easy to age and chip after a long time use under the outdoor environment. And low AEMC of RF3 was attributed to using tile as cover material to a certain extent, because the production of some pollutants would be reduced by the good erosion-corrosion resistance of tile roof during the runoff process.

Furthermore, distributions of runoff pollutants for all the catchments were similar except for DCOD. The proportions of TDS, DTN, and DTP in total ones were 26.19%–30.91%, 83.29%–90.51%, and 61.54%–68.09%, respectively. It could be observed that solids exist as particulate phase in urban runoff. Conversely, dissolved matters are the mainly existing phase of nutrients which is usually expressed as nitrogen and phosphorus [24]. Based on the monitoring data, distribution of organic pollutants was closely related to the cover material of urban catchments. For asphalt road and roof (RD1, RD2, and RF1), the proportions of DCOD in TCOD were in the range from 71.76% to 86.23%. But because about half TCOD exist as dissolved phase, the distribution of organic pollutants was equally represented in rainfall runoff from the catchments used inorganic cover material, such as concrete and tile.

3.2. Characterizing Runoff Pollutants in Different Phases during Typical Rainfall Event

During a rainfall event, pollutants transport in different phases is affected by several factors, such as rainfall distribution, catchments type, and pollutant component. Taking a rainfall event of July 20, 2011 (22.2 mm) for example, the rainfall distribution was showed in Figure 1.

964737.fig.001
Figure 1: Distribution of typical rainfall (July 20, 2011).

Figure 2 showed the variation of pollutant concentrations in different phases. Most runoff pollutants from both RD1 and RF1 were mostly characterized by the tendency that the concentration at the initial stage of rainfall was high and then sharply decreased to a low value. As showed in Table 1, the high intensity rainfall occurred in the later period, so pollutant concentrations increased in various degrees. The highest concentration of RD1 (except nutrients) appeared in the later period of rainfall when the rainfall intensity rose dramatically, whereas that of RF1 occurred at the beginning of runoff generation. It was possible that the washoff of runoff pollutants in RF1 was less suffered from the influence of rainfall intensity due to its small area and smooth surface. However, for the road (RD1), some pollutants, especially particulate matter, might be intercepted by coarse surface during low intensity rainfall, which could not be washed off into the runoff until rainfall intensity rose to reach sufficient strength. The concentrations of nutrients, including TN, DTN, and PTN, have little or no effect by the variety of rainfall intensity. The reason might be that nitrogen in water environment was found mainly in four forms: ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, and organic nitrogen. Only part of organic nitrogen exists as particulate phase, and others are all dissolved matter [25]. The characterization of previous runoff pollutants also reappeared for other rainfall events monitored in this study.

fig2
Figure 2: Runoff pollutograph from RD1 and RF1 during rainfall event of July 20, 2011.
3.3. Correlation Analysis between Runoff Pollutants in Different Phases

According to previous research, there were good linear correlations between runoff pollutants. Several pollutants could be considered as surrogates for others so as to reduce the enormous costs to monitor [2628]. In this study, correlations of runoff pollutants were performed very closely at the same kinds of catchments, so linear correlations of runoff pollutants in different phases were analyzed using combined data, in which data of roof pollutants was collected from RF1, RF2, and RF3, and that of road pollutants was from RD1 and RD2. Pearson’s coefficient was used for ranking the correlation. When , it could be determined as strong correlation between runoff pollutants [29]. Correlation analysis results between runoff pollutants in different phases from roof and road were showed in Table 4.

tab4
Table 4: Correlation between runoff pollutants in different phases.

Among both road and roof runoff pollutants, TSS showed a strong correlation with particulate matters, except for PTN. It might be caused that there were significant differences between PTN and other pollutants of influencing factor on concentration variation mentioned earlier. And one pollutant in different phases was also strongly correlated with each other exclusive of PCOD-DCOD, TSS-TDS in road runoff, and TSS-TDS in roof runoff. Besides, DCOD was strongly correlated with dissolved matters in roof runoff; however, similar results were not found in road runoff. Therefore, TSS could be considered as a surrogate for particulate matters in both road and roof runoffs, while DCOD could be regarded as a surrogate for dissolved matters in roof runoff.

4. Conclusions

This paper focused on characterization of urban runoff pollution between dissolved and particulate phases. The results showed that the AEMC values of runoff pollutants in different phases from urban roads were higher than the ones from urban roofs. The proportions of total dissolved solids, dissolved total nitrogen, and dissolved total phosphorus in total ones for all the catchments were 26.19%–30.91%, 83.29%–90.51%, and 61.54%–68.09%, respectively. During rainfall events, the concentration at the initial stage of rainfall was high and then sharply decreased to a low value. Affected by catchments characterization and rainfall distribution, the highest concentration of road pollutants might appear in the later period of rainfall. Strong correlations were also found among runoff pollutants in different phases. Among both road and roof runoff pollutants, TSS shows a strong correlation with particulate matters, except for PTN. DCOD is strongly correlated with dissolved matters in roof runoff.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Major Science and Technology Program for Water Pollution Control and Treatment (no. 2012ZX07203-003) and Major Basic Research Programs of Hebei Province (no. 12966738D).

References

  1. UN Environment Program, GEO Year Book 2003, United Nations, New York, NY, USA, 2004.
  2. B. S. Davis and G. F. Birch, “Catchment-wide assessment of the cost-effectiveness of stormwater remediation measures in urban areas,” Environmental Science and Policy, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 84–91, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. V. Novotny, “Integrating diffuse/nonpoint pollution control and water body restoration into watershed management,” Journal of the American Water Resources Association, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 717–727, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. G. Mangani, A. Berloni, F. Bellucci, F. Tatàno, and M. Maione, “Evaluation of the pollutant content in road runoff first flush waters,” Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, vol. 160, no. 1–4, pp. 213–228, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. A. E. Barbosa, J. N. Fernandes, and L. M. David, “Key issues for sustainable urban stormwater management,” Water Research, vol. 46, no. 20, pp. 6787–6798, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  6. United States Environmental Protection Agency, “The use of best management practices (BMPs) in urban watersheds,” EPA 600-R-04-184, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC, USA, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  7. J. Gasperi, S. Garnaud, V. Rocher, and R. Moilleron, “Priority pollutants in surface waters and settleable particles within a densely urbanised area: case study of Paris (France),” Science of the Total Environment, vol. 407, no. 8, pp. 2900–2908, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. L.-Q. LI, C.-Q. YIN, Q.-C. HE, and L.-L. KONG, “First flush of storm runoff pollution from an urban catchment in China,” Journal of Environmental Sciences, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 295–299, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. G. Kim, J. Yur, and J. Kim, “Diffuse pollution loading from urban stormwater runoff in Daejeon city, Korea,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 9–16, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. A. Deletic and D. W. Orr, “Pollution buildup on road surfaces,” Journal of Environmental Engineering, vol. 131, no. 1, pp. 49–59, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. B. Bian and W. Zhu, “Particle size distribution and pollutants in road-deposited sediments in different areas of Zhenjiang, China,” Environmental Geochemistry and Health, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 511–520, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. H. Zhao, X. Li, X. Wang, and D. Tian, “Grain size distribution of road-deposited sediment and its contribution to heavy metal pollution in urban runoff in Beijing, China,” Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 183, no. 1-3, pp. 203–210, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. S. Zgheib, R. Moilleron, M. Saad, and G. Chebbo, “Partition of pollution between dissolved and particulate phases: what about emerging substances in urban stormwater catchments?” Water Research, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 913–925, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. National Research Council, Urban Stormwater Management in the United States, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA, 2009.
  15. TRCA, Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Planning and Design Guide, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Toronto, Canada, 2010.
  16. S. Wang, Q. He, H. Ai, Z. Wang, and Q. Zhang, “Pollutant concentrations and pollution loads in stormwater runoff from different land uses in Chongqing,” Journal of Environmental Sciences, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 502–510, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  17. K. Lamprea and V. Ruban, “Characterization of atmospheric deposition and runoff water in a small suburban catchment,” Environmental Technology, vol. 32, no. 9-10, pp. 1141–1149, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. C. Henderson, M. Greenway, and I. Phillips, “Removal of dissolved nitrogen, phosphorous and carbon from stormwater by biofiltration mesocosms,” Water Science and Technology, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 183–191, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. APHA, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water, Public Health Association, Washington, DC, USA, 2005.
  20. H. Shirasuna, T. Fukushima, K. Matsushige, A. Imai, and N. Ozaki, “Runoff and loads of nutrients and heavy metals from an urbanized area,” Water Science and Technology, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 203–213, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. J.-W. Zhao, B.-Q. Shan, and C.-Q. Yin, “Pollutant loads of surface runoff in Wuhan City Zoo, an urban tourist area,” Journal of Environmental Sciences, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 464–468, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. C. S. Lee, G. T. Seo, J. H. Lee, Y. S. Yoon, J. J. You, and C. K. Sin, “Long term monitoring of storm surface runoff from urban pavement road in Korea,” Environmental Engineering Research, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 184–191, 2008. View at Google Scholar
  23. M. Francey, T. D. Fletcher, A. Deletic, and H. Duncan, “New insights into the quality of urban storm water in South Eastern Australia,” Journal of Environmental Engineering, vol. 136, no. 4, pp. 381–390, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. N. P. Miguntanna, A. Liu, P. Egodawatta, and A. Goonetilleke, “Characterising nutrients wash-off for effective urban stormwater treatment design,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 120, pp. 61–67, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  25. K. R. Reddy and R. D. DeLaune, Biogeochemistry of Wetlands: Science and Applications, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla, USA, 2008.
  26. X. Zeng and T. C. Rasmussen, “Multivariate statistical characterization of water quality in Lake Lanier, Georgia, USA,” Journal of Environmental Quality, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 1980–1991, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. L. Herngren, A. Goonetilleke, and G. A. Ayoko, “Understanding heavy metal and suspended solids relationships in urban stormwater using simulated rainfall,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 149–158, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. S. Settle, A. Goonetilleke, and G. A. Ayoko, “Determination of surrogate indicators for phosphorus and solids in urban stormwater: application of multivariate data analysis techniques,” Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, vol. 182, no. 1–4, pp. 149–161, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. Y. H. Han, S. L. Lau, M. Kayhanian, and M. K. Stenstrom, “Correlation analysis among highway stormwater pollutants and characteristics,” Water Science and Technology, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 235–243, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus